Effect of Parameterization on Statistical Power and Effect Size Estimation in Latent Growth Modeling
- PMID: 34335003
- PMCID: PMC8323510
- DOI: 10.1080/10705511.2021.1878895
Effect of Parameterization on Statistical Power and Effect Size Estimation in Latent Growth Modeling
Abstract
The difference between groups in their random slopes is frequently examined in latent growth modeling to evaluate treatment efficacy. However, when end centering is used for model parameterization with a randomized design, the difference in the random intercepts is the model-estimated mean difference between the groups at the end of the study, which has the same expected value as the product of the coefficient for the slope difference and study duration. A Monte Carlo study found that (a) the statistical power to detect the treatment effect was greater when determined from the intercept instead of the slope difference, and (b) the standard error of the model-estimated mean difference was smaller when obtained from the intercept difference. Investigators may reduce Type II errors by comparing groups in random intercepts instead of random slopes to test treatment effects, and should therefore conduct power assessments using end centering to detect each difference.
Keywords: effect sizes; latent growth models; randomized controlled trials; statistical power.
Similar articles
-
Regression-Equivalent Effect Sizes for Latent Growth Modeling and Associated Null Hypothesis Significance Tests.Struct Equ Modeling. 2023;30(4):672-685. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2022.2139702. Epub 2022 Nov 28. Struct Equ Modeling. 2023. PMID: 37588162 Free PMC article.
-
Time-Varying Effect Sizes for Quadratic Growth Models in Multilevel and Latent Growth Modeling.Struct Equ Modeling. 2019;26(3):418-429. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2018.1547110. Epub 2018 Dec 20. Struct Equ Modeling. 2019. PMID: 31579365 Free PMC article.
-
Precision, Reliability, and Effect Size of Slope Variance in Latent Growth Curve Models: Implications for Statistical Power Analysis.Front Psychol. 2018 Apr 17;9:294. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00294. eCollection 2018. Front Psychol. 2018. PMID: 29755377 Free PMC article.
-
Confidence interval estimation for standardized effect sizes in multilevel and latent growth modeling.J Consult Clin Psychol. 2015 Feb;83(1):157-68. doi: 10.1037/a0037721. Epub 2014 Sep 1. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2015. PMID: 25181028 Free PMC article.
-
Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives.Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(33):1-56. doi: 10.3310/hta5330. Health Technol Assess. 2001. PMID: 11701102 Review.
Cited by
-
Trajectories of episodic memory in midlife: Historical change from a cross-country perspective.Psychol Aging. 2025 Mar;40(2):197-217. doi: 10.1037/pag0000870. Epub 2024 Dec 16. Psychol Aging. 2025. PMID: 39679986
-
Loneliness in midlife: Historical increases and elevated levels in the United States compared with Europe.Am Psychol. 2025 Jul-Aug;80(5):744-756. doi: 10.1037/amp0001322. Epub 2024 Mar 18. Am Psychol. 2025. PMID: 38497781 Free PMC article.
-
Regression-Equivalent Effect Sizes for Latent Growth Modeling and Associated Null Hypothesis Significance Tests.Struct Equ Modeling. 2023;30(4):672-685. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2022.2139702. Epub 2022 Nov 28. Struct Equ Modeling. 2023. PMID: 37588162 Free PMC article.
-
Midlife blues: A lifespan perspective on midlife depressive symptoms.Psychol Aging. 2025 Jun 2:10.1037/pag0000906. doi: 10.1037/pag0000906. Online ahead of print. Psychol Aging. 2025. PMID: 40455504
References
-
- Agresti A (2002). Categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
-
- Banjanovic ES, & Osborne JW (2016). Confidence intervals for effect sizes: Applying bootstrap resampling. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 21, 1–18.
-
- Benichou J, & Gail MH (1989). A delta method for implicitly defined random variables. The American Statistician, 43, 41–44.
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources